The City of Cedartown's ethics committee Thursday night dismissed all charges in an ethics complaint brought forth last month against two Cedartown City Commission members.

George Anderson, who runs the statewide non-profit organization Ethics in Government Group, filed a written complaint with the city at the commission's September meeting. While commissioners disputed the veracity of Anderson's alllegations, the commission agreed to forward the complaint to its ethics committee.

Anderson was allowed to present his allegations in person. Told he would have 10 minutes to make his case, he was extended the courtesy of nearly 45 minutes.

Opposing Anderson was city attorney Rob Monroe, who argued that Anderson failed to present evidence of any violations that warranted disciplinary action by the committee.

Monroe asked the committee to dismiss the charges. The committee members -- Chairman Tom Lowe, James Couey, Becky Sweat and George Wheeler -- unanimously agreed that Anderson failed to prove his case.

"I think he's done a lot of talking but hasn't proved anything," Couey said.

Anderson's complaint singled out commissioners Scott Tillery and John Barrett. Neither attended Thursday's meeting.

In earlier statements, both disputed the accuracy of Anderson's complaints and vowed they had done nothing wrong. Both men also argued that the timing of the complaint seemed to be politically motivated -- Tillery and Barrett are two of only three commissioners who are up for re-election this year. The municipal election will be held Nov. 2.

The primary complaint against Barrett was that he voted on a bond refinancing proposal when he should have recused himself. Barrett is a vice president at First National Bank of Polk County, the same bank that won the bid for refinancing of construction bonds that funded the construction of a city industrial park.

The official minutes of that January meeting showed that there was a unanimous vote by the commission. However, the city's secretary was unavailable that night and the minutes were recorded by a substitute. Barrett maintains he abstained, as he has done numerous times in the past when his bank was involved in a commission vote. Other commissioners agreed with Barrett that he abstained and the minutes were incorrect.

Anderson conceded that it made no sense for Barrett to have voted on this matter -- the motion would have passed without his vote and he had abstained on such votes in the past. However, Anderson claimed that "local citizens," who he did not name, told him they were at that meeting and that Barrett did not abstain.

Discussion then moved on to Anderson's complaints against Tillery. The focus was on what Anderson described as numerous telephone calls made by Tillery to city department heads. In his opening statements to the committee, Anderson described phone calls of 45 minutes and 60 minutes that he said tied up public employees and kept them from carrying out their tasks. He said these repeated phone calls violated the city's charter, which requires that all city business be routed through the city manager as the supervisor of city employees.

Anderson alleged that Tillery was guilty of micromanagement.

"I've been all around the state," Anderson said. "I have not found another city councilman who is so involved."

Committee members, however, said the documents Anderson presented do not show any wrongdoing by Tillery.

Sweat, pouring over phone records that Anderson had presented, said the calls did not seem to be as frequent, pervasive or as lengthy as Anderson suggested.

"The most I've seen so far are a 10-minute phone call," Sweat said. "Most are a minute, two minutes. There's maybe three calls in one day, then there's several days with no calls at all."

Anderson directed the committee's attention to calls he had highlighted, which included one 79-minute conversation and another that was 47 minutes long. However, committee members were unconvinced.

Lowe pointed out that the phone records only showed when Tillery had called and for how long. There was no evidence that any of these phone conversations strayed into improper territory.

"I just have not seen the substance of the phone calls," Lowe said. "I just am not seeing the meat here."

Monroe suggested that Tillery had every right as a commissioner to contact city employees. Many of the calls were to the city's cemetery director, for example. Tillery has been active on the commission's cemetery committee.

Anderson raised other issues, but these allegations were not allowed to go very far as Anderson had no documentation to back them up. For example, Anderson claims he has been contacted by city employees who allege that Tillery used his influence to have employees fired, and his friends hired. Asked for proof of this, however, Anderson admitted that no one was willing to come forward and make a signed statement, which "kind of ties my hands behind my back."

Other issues raised in Anderson's 14-page complaint were similarly dismissed.

Anderson was undeterred by the committee's decision Thursday night. Telling the committee that he had "expected" a vote for dismissal, he promised that he would continue to press his complaints through the local district attorney's office and with the state governor's office.